Fine v. Semet’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1056 (§ 206 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1103 (§ 403 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1104 (§ 404 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1106 (§ 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1108 (§ 408 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1109 (§ 409 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Pepper v. Litton · Iron Workers Local # 272 v. Bowen · 485 F. Supp. 629 - Freund v. Marshall & Ilsley Bank · Nedd v. United Mine Workers · Bayles v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Here the trustees validly premised different treatment [of Semet] on consideration of the greater impact Semet's request would have on the plan assets as a whole,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fine v. Semet · Fine v. Semet“no persuasive support exists for the allegation that improper leveraging was intended or attempted.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fine v. Semet · Fine v. Semet“financial loss to the other participants.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fine v. Semet · Fine v. Semet
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.